Duke   University   Libraries 

Correspondence 
Conf  Pam  12mo  #418 


CORRESPONDENCE 


BETWEEN 


THE    PRESIDENT 


( REBEL  Ah TnK 


v^ 


VIRGINIA  CENTRAL         ROAD  COMPANY 


AND   THE 


POSTMASTER    GENERAL, 


IN    RELATION   TO. 


POSTAL  SERVICE 


RICHMOND,   VA. 

Printed   by   Ritchie    &   Dunnavant 

1864. 


/ 


George  Washington  Flowers 
Memorial  Collection 

DUKE  UNIVERSITY  LIBRARY 


ESTABLISHED  BY  THE 

FAMILY  OF 

COLONEL   FLOWERS 


CORRESPONDENCE. 


i\i\  Ckntral  Rail  Road, 
I' resident's  Office.  Beacerdam.   Va..  July  3. 

Dear  Sib  : 

As  this  company  i>  continuing  i<>  curry  the  mail  without 
having  made  any  contract,  u>  prevent  misconstruction,  I  write,  to  say 
that  I  cannot  consent  to  a  renewal  of  some  of  its  condition*. 

Besides  objections  to  the  unprecedented  rigor  in  demanding  ft  lit 
compliance  with  the  term  i  of  the  contract,  I  cannot  consent  that  any  01 . 
shall  be  authorized  to  occupy  a  large  apartment  in  one  of  our  ears,  fti  d 
the  chief  officers  of  the  company  not  be  allowed  to  enter  it,  when  it  i« 
possible  that  it  may  be  used  to  the  greal  prejudice  of  its  interests. 

Yt-r  illy. 


I      FONTAINE,  V 


Hon.  ./.   U.    Ke<igan.   P.    M.   Gf.rural. 


<  tFFlCN    DcPARTM 

Richmond)  J> 
Sir: 

Your  letter  sf  the  3d  msta.nl  ifl  receiTed.  in  which yo  i 
ot  consent  to  a  renewal  of  some  of  the  conditions  on  which  your  < 
pany  carries  thaunails.    Fou  Bay,  "beside*  abactions  ta  the  unpri 
rigor  in  demanding  a  literal  compliance  with  the  terms  of  the  contract,  I 
cannot  consent  that  any  one  shall  be  authorta  d  to  occupy  a  large  a; 
ment  m  one  of  our  car*  and  the  chief  officers  of  the  company  not  he 
allowed  to  enter  it,  when  it  is  possible  that  it  may  be  used  to  the  - 
prejudice  of  its  inter* 

I  hope,  by  a  proper  understanding,  your  objections  to  a  renew:, 
your  contract  with  tie-  department  may  be  obviated. 

On  the  first  point.  I  have  to  say  that  tin-  performance  of  the  mail  ser- 
vice and  of  my  duties  connected  with  it.  ar<>  regnlat  .1  by  law.     "W 
the  service  is  performed  according  to  contract,  t'...-  contractor  is  nee 
rily  paid  the  full  contract  price  for  the  -«  rvice.     Where  the  contra- 
fail  to  perform  the  service.  T  am  required  by  law  to  make  proper  dedue- 
tion.s  from  their  pay.     Such  deductions  are  made  upon  fixed  and  re:. 


/ 
ible  rules;  and  if  those  should  in  any  case  be  so  misapplied  as  to  work 

injustice  to  a  contractor,  a  representation  of  the  facts  to  the  department 
would  cause  a  prompt  correction  of  the  error.  It  is  on  these  principles 
that  I  have  endeavored  to  act;  and  while  it  has  been  my  object  to  exact 
in  behalf  of  the  public  a  faithful  performance  of  duty  by  contractors  for 
carrying  the  mails,  I  have  been  equally  careful  to  avoid  unreasonable  or 
unlawful  exactions.  And  I  have  uniformly  consulted  the  rail  road  com- 
panies with  which  we  have  contracts,  as  to  schedules,  and  had  special 
reference  to  their  wishes  in  fixing  them,  se  as  to  avoid  injury  to  their  in- 
terests as  far  as  possible. 

On  the  other  point  made  in  your  letter,  I  would  say  that  it  was  found 
that  in  some  instances  rail  road  conductors  were  making  use  of  the  mail 
cars  as  their  offices,  and  as  a  consequence,  taking  their  friends  and  ac- 
quaintances into  the  mail  cars  at  pleasure.  This  produced  serious  com- 
plaints from  route  agents,  and  to  a  greater  or  less  extent  endangered  the 
security  Of  the  mails.     It  was  this  which  gave  rise  to  the  order  to  exclude 

i  persons  from  the  mail  ears  except  the  sworn  agents  of  the  department, 
or  those  having  its  permission.  Cases  have  been  brought  to  my  know  - 
ledge  in  which  the  presidents  and  superintendents  of  rail  roads  have  com- 
plained" of  the  rule,  on  the  ground  of  its  exclusion  of' them  from  the  mail 
cars,  as  well  as  on  the  ground  you  mention,  of  the  necessity  for  the  com- 
panies to  have  the  power  of  police  over  the  mail  cars,  as  well  as  others, 
to  guard  against  abuse  by  the  transportation  of  other  than  mail  matter. 
Iu  these  cases  I  have  directed  that  the  presidents  and  superintendents  of 
rail  roads  should  be  allowed,  when  they  wished,  to  travel  in  the  mail  cars, 
:nd  that  conductors  should  ill  all  cases  be  allowed  to  pass  through  and 
«  xamine  the  mail  cars,  to  prevent  any  thing  improper  from  being  carried 
i  a  them.  I  did  not  know  but  that  this  had  been  made  known  to  you,  and 
will  have  instructions  to  this  effect  sent  to  the  route  agents  on  your  road. 

1  trust  that  these  suggestions  will  obviate  your  objections  to  renewing 
v  our  contract. 

Very  respectfully, 

JOHN  H.  REAGAN,  P.  M.  General. 
E.  Fontaine,  Esq.,  Pres.   Va.  Central  R.  R.  Co- 


Post  Office  Department, 
lnsjjcction   Office,  Richmond,  July  8,  18(>3. 
Sir  : 

The  postmaster  general  has  so  far  modified  my  order  of  Sep- 
tember 3,  1862,  as  to  allow  the  president  and  superintendent  of  the  Vir- 
ginia Central  rail  road  to  travel  in  the  mail  cars,  should  they  desire  to  do 
And,  as  that  order  was  never  intended  to  affect  the  right  of  the  con- 


ductors  to  enter  and  inspect  the  mail  cars,  so  as  to  prevent  the  transpor- 
tation of  improper  articles  in  them,  you  will  of  course  offer  no  opposition 
to  their  entrance  for  this  purpose.  You  will  not,  however,  submit  to  an} 
claim  by  conductors  to  use  your  apartment  for  the  transaction  of  their 
own  business,  or  that  of  the  company. 

Respectfully. 

B.  FULLER,   Chief  Clerk  P.  O.  D 

(r.  G.  Gooch,  Esq.,  Route  Agent,  Richmond,  fa. 

Copies  of  the  above  sent  on  same  date  to  T.  J.  L  E    J.  Swif 

and  W.  H.  Haas,  route  agents. 


Virginia  CentHAA  Rail  Hi 
President's   Office,  Richmond.   Vc.  April  9, 
Dear  Sib  : 

On  the  3d  of  July  last  I  apprised  you  that  the  contract 
with  the  department  contained  certain  conditions  to  which  I  was  not  will- 
ing to  be  bound  by  signing-,  but  would  continue  to  <  any  the  mails,  on 
same  terms  of  course,  until  changed  bj  >mp«-nsation. 

The  treasurer  of  this  company  informs  me  that  you  declined  payln 
service  rendered,  as  he  understood,  on  the  ground  that  the  contract  Wa* 
not  signed,  thereby  subjecting  the  company  to  tin-  objectionable  features. 

There  are  three  objections  to  the  contract:  1st.  the  right  claim 
line  for  some  delinquency,  without  stating  whai  it  is  and  where  it  oc- 
curred; 2d,  the  exclusion  of  the  officers  of  the  company  from  the  mai 
car;  and  3d,  the  exaction  of  lines  for  not  carrying  the  mails,  though 
vented  by  military  authority  from  doing  it. 

Your  letter  was  received,  saving  that  one  of  these  obligations  would 
not  be  enforced;  and  whilst  T  do  not  impugn  the  sincerity  of  your  pro- 
mise, yet  it  does  not  comport  with  my  views  of  propriety  in  a  business 
transaction,  to  become  bound,  in  writing,  to  a  condition  objected  to,  re 
lying  on  the  promise  of  forbearance  in  requiring  compliance. 

Be  good  enough  to  inform  me  whether  you  insist  on  having  the  con- 
tract signed  without  modification,  as  a  prerequisite  to  payment  for  ser- 
vice rendered.  If  your  sense  of  duty  under  the  law  should  compel  you 
to  take  that  course,  I  suppose  I  can  only  obtain  compensation  by  an  act 
of  congress. 

Very  respectfully, 

E.  FONTAINE,   President 
Hon.  J.  H.  Reagan,  P.  M.  General. 


Post  Office  Department, 

Richmond,  April  11,  1864. 
Sir: 

Your  letter  of  the  9th  instant  is  received,  in  which  you  say,. 
"There  are  three  objections  to  the  contract:  1st,  the  right  claimed  to 
fine  for  some  delinquency,  without  stating  what  it  is  and  when  it  occur- 
red ;  second,  the  exclusion  of  the  officers  of  the  company  from  the  mail 
car;  and  third,  the  exaction  of  fines  for  not  carrying  the  mails,  though 
prevented  by  military  authority  from  doing  it." 

In  answer  to  your  first  objection,  I  have  to  say  that  whenever  fines  and 
deductions  are  made  from  the  pay  of  a  contractor  for  failures  to  perform 
service,  they  are  notified,  when  the  settlement  of  the  service  for  the 
quarter  is  made,  of  the  amount  of  such  fines  or  deductions,  the  dates  of 
all  failures,  and  the  places  at  which  such  failures  were  made;  and  this 
has  been  the  established  and  uniform  rule  of  the  department  since  the 
3d  of  March  1863. 

In  answer  to  your  second  objection,  I  have  to  say  that  in  my  letter  to 
you  of  July  8th,  1863,  you  were  informed  that  the  rule  excluding  all 
persons  from  the  mail  cars,  had  been  so  far  modified,  and  corresponding 
directions  given  to  our  agents  on  all  rail  roads,  as  to  allow  the  presidents 
and  superintendents  of  rail  roads  to  travel  in  the  mail  cars  when  they 
wished  to  do  so,  and  that  conductors  should  at  all  times  be  allowed  to 
pass  through  and  examine  the  mail  cars,  to  prevent  any  thing  improper 
from  being  conveyed  in  them. 

There  exists,  therefore,  no  ground  in  fact  for  these  two  objections, 
unless  yon  desire  the  substance  of  these  instructions  inserted  in  the 
contract  with  your  company,  to  which  there  is  no  objection  by  this 
department. 

In  answer  to  your  third  objection,  I  have  to  say  that  this  department 
undertakes  to  pay  a  sum  agreed  upon,  for  an  amount  of  service  agreed 
on,  to  be  performed  in  a  manner  and  by  a  schedule  agreed  on.  You 
make  no  complaint  of  the  failure  or  unwillingness  of  the  department  to 
pay  for  all  the  service  you  perform  for  it.  But  you  do  object  to  entering 
into  a  contract  with  it,  because  it  will  not  agree  to  pay  you  for  what  you 
do  not  do.  This  1  could  not  do  under  the  law  if  I  would.  If  you  are 
damaged  by  the  orders  of  the  war  department  interfering  with  your 
schedules,  that  department,  and  not  this,  is  responsible  for  such  damage. 
The  expenses  of  this  department  are,  by  the  requirements  of  the  consti- 
tution, to  be  paid  out  of  its  own  revenues.  Congress  can  give  it  no 
assistance  from  the  general  treasury.  Nor  can  the  other  departments 
contribute  any  means  to  aid  in  defraying  its  expenses.  In  this  respect 
it  stands  alone.  And  while  it  is  confidently  believed  it  will  be  able  to 
pay  all  its  own  just  liabilities,  it  might  not  be  able  to  pay  such  damages 
as  might  result  from  the  orders  of  other  departments,  and  cannot  in 
reason  be  expected  to  do  so  in  any  case. 


7 

We  cannot  expect  to  carry  on  the  postal  service  successfully-  ami  bare 
no  right  to  attempt  it  in  any  other  way  than  that  prescribed  by  law. 
The  law  requires  the  making  of  contracts  for  conveying  the  mails-,  and 
forbids  the  payment  for  such  service  without  contrat  t>. 

Very  respectfully, 

Your  obedient  servant. 

JOHN  H.  REAGAN.  P.   M.   General. 
E.  Fontaine,  Esq.,  Pres.  Va.  Central  R.  R.  Co. 


Richmond,  April  15,  1864. 
Dear  Sir: 

Your  letter  of  the  11th  iustant  meets  partially  one  of 
my  objections  to  signing  the  contract,  viz  :  that  right  which  is  claimed  to 
exclude  the  officers  of  the  company  from  the  mail  car.  You  are  willing 
to  provide  for  admitting  the  president  and  superintendent.  Is  there  not 
the  same  reason  for  embracing  the  directors  ?  I  am  aware  of  the  impro- 
priety of  the  mail  car  being  occupied  by  passengers  indiscriminately. 
Do  you  think  that  a  discretion  on  this  subject  is  more  safely  trusted  with 
one  of  your  route  agents  than  with  the  president  »>f  one  of  our  rail  roads  ? 

The  practice  of  your  department  on  the  subject  of  fines  conveys  an 
insinuation  against  the  honesty  of  a  rail  road  president.  Do  you  really 
think  that  a  prominent  officer  of  a  rail  road  company  would  deliberately 
make  a  false  statement  to  get  rid  of  a  fine  of  a  few  dollars  ?  I  never 
expected  that  the  administration  of  one  of  our  departments  of  govern- 
ment would  compare  unfavorably  with  the  rejected,  and  now  deservedly 
detested  one  of  the  old  Union.  Why  reverse  the  rule  of  enlightened, 
civilized  and  christian  law,  and  presume  every  man  dishonest?  If  this  is 
not  to  be  the  case,  I  can  see  no  good  reason  for  departing  from  the  practice 
of  the  old  government,  and  inform  the  contractor  that  you  propose  to 
tine  him  for  some  supposed  delinquency,  unless  he  can  give  a  sufficient 
excuse.  Then  he  might  explain  it ;  but  at  the  end  of  a  quarter  or  later, 
he  probably  would  have  lost  a  knowledge  of  the  facts  of  the  case.  Your 
rule  is  calculated  to  work  injustice,  and  acquiescence  in  it  by  the  con- 
tractor would  seem  to  be  a  concession  that  the  department  may  not 
expect  the  truth  from  any  one. 

Your  subordinate  agent  of  the  post  office  department  will  admit  whom 
he  chooses  in  the  mail  car.  I  say  will,  because  you  can't  prevent  it,  and 
yet  you  reflect  on  the  directors  of  a  rail  road  company,  by  refusing  them 
admission,  and  cannot  trust  the  discretion  of  the  president  or  superin- 
tendent to  say  who  may,  under  extraordinary  circumstances,  be  admitted. 

I  think  there  is  good  ground  for  these  two  objections,  after  your  partial 
modification. 


.     8 

In  relation  to  the  3d,  your  argument  is,  that  as  we  agree  to  perform  » 
specified  service,  if  we  fail  in  any  part  of  it,  no  matter  for  what  cause, 
whether  by  our  fault  or  not,  we  must  be  fined.  We  fit  up  mail  cars  at 
considerable  expense.  We  appropriate  them  to  the  accommodation  of 
the  mails.  We  agree,  for  a  very  small  sum,  to  carry  them  for  a  year. 
You  can  hardly  be  ignorant  that  if  the  same  car  was  appropriated  to  any 
other  transportation,  it  would  pay  a  much  larger  sum.  We  are  always 
ready  to  perform  the  promised  service :  but  a  power  we  cannot  resist — 
and  patriotism  forbids  that  we  should  relist  if  we  could — prevents  us  from 
carrying  the  mail,  and  yet  you  inflict  a  penalty  on  the  rail  road  company 
as  a  defaulter,  when  it  was  ready  and  willing  to  perform  the  required 
service  but  for  the  interposition  of  a  superior  power,  under  circumstances 
of  publicnecessity  affecting  the  safety  of  the  very  government  of  which 
you  are  a  part,  and  which  it  is  your  duty  to  protect. 

Your  argument  is,  "that  we  must  not  expect  compensation  for  what 
we  do  not  do."  On  this  assumption,  if  you  failed  to  give  us  any  mails 
to  cany  on  any  day,  though  we  ran  the  usual  car  empty  over  our  whole 
route,  we  must  be  fined,  because  we  carried  no  mails,  though  it  was  from 
your  own  default,  and  our  expenses  were  precisely  the  same  as  if  we  had 
carried  it. 

It  is  a  mockery  to  refer  us  to  the  war  department  to  compensate  us  for 
your  fines  for  obeying  their  order,  when  that  department  has  no  funds 
which  it  can  thus  appropriate. 

You  have  refused,  as  I  understand  you,  to  pay  this  company  for  ser- 
vices actually  rendered,  because  I  have  declined  to  subject  the  company 
to  some  very  obnoxious  conditions.  If  the  services  are  rendered,  is  there 
not  a  moral  obligation  to  pay  for  them?  The  immoral  government  of 
the  old  Union  never  refused  payment  because  there  was  not  a  written 
contract  to  compel.  But  you  say  that  the  law  forbids  paying  for  such 
services  without  contracts. 

How  is  it  that  other  rail  road  companies  have  been  paid  without  signing 
contracts  ?  I  understand  this  to  be  the  fact.  My  objections  I  know  are 
entertained  by  many  of  our  rail  road  companies,  and  consequently  they 
have  not  signed  contracts,  but  nevertheless  they  have  been  paid,  as  / 
think  they  should  have  been. 

The  practice  in  your  department  is  both  unjust  and  inconsistent,  and 
if  persisted  in,  must  drive  me  for  redress  to  some  other  source. 

Very  respectfully,  yours,  &c. 

E.  FONTAINE,  President 

Fa.  Central  R.  R.  Co. 
Hon.  J.  H.  Reagan,  P.  M.  General. 


Post  Office  Department, 
Richmond,  April  20,   ! 
Sir  : 

Your  letter  of  the  15th  instant,  in  answer  to  mine  of  the  1  lth. 
s  just  received.     It  exhibits  each  a  departure  from  the  ordinary  eourte- 
Biee  of  official  correspondence,  and  so  persistent  a  determination  to  mis 
understand  and  misrepresent  what  was  said  with  the  sole  view  of  con- 
ceding every  thing  to  your  company  which  you  demanded,  which  could 
be  conceded  according  to  law  and  the  rules  of  right,  and  'hows  go  mani- 
fest a  purpose  to  engage  in  useless  -controversy,  that  I  can  see  no  good 
vhich  could  probably  wise  from  any  further  answer  to  it  than  to  ackhow 
edge  its  receipt,  and  to  say  that  no  desire  has,  in  any  way.  been  mani- 
fested by  this  department  to  make  any  other  exactions  or  to  impose  any 
)ther  terms  on  the  road  of  which  you  are  the  president,  than  those  which 
tie  made  of  every  other  rail  road  in  the  service. 
Very  respectful  1\ . 

JOHN  H.  REAGAN.   P.  M.  General. 
S    Fontaine.  Esq..  Pres.  Vtu  Central   R.  R.  Co. 


Virginia  <  intra l  Rail  R 
President's  Office,  Beaver  J  am,  Pin.,  April  22. 
Drab  Sur 

Your  letter,  stating  that  yea  considered  mine  of  the 
15th  instant  discourteous,  has  been  received. 

Writing  under  some   little  excitement,  from  your  declining  to   n 
vitli  this  company,  as  you  had,  done  with  others  under  similar  circum- 
ces,  I  used  strong  language  to  illustrate  my  objections  to  the  contract 
ted  on  in  the  department ;  hut  as  I  do  not  consider  discourtesy  any 
note  justifiable  in  official  than  in  private  correspondence,  although  you 
done  me  injustice  in  your  last  letter,  I  have  no  hesitation  in  s. 
[  did  not  mean  to  be  offensive,  nor  do  1  now  think  my  letter  is  justic- 
iable to  such  construction. 

My  sole  object  was  to  endeavor  to  explain  to  you  that  your  mode  of  en- 
forcing  the  execution  of  the  contract,  though  not  designed,  nevertheless 
seemed  to  me  to  imply  that  the  president  and  directors  of  rail  road  com- 
panies were  unworthy  of  confidence,  which  no  gentleman,  by  any  act  of 
lis.  would  be  willing  to  concede  even  by  implication,  and  to  call  youf 
attention  to  a  fact,  of  which  you  might  not  be  aware,  that  an  odious  dis 
crimination  was  made  against  it  in  the  settlement  of  claims  with  yonr 
department. 

Very  respectfully, 

E.  FONTAINE.  President. 
Hon.  J.  H.  Reagan,  P.  M.  General. 
2 


10 

Post  Office  Department, 

Richmond,  April  26,  1864. 
Sim  - 

hi  answer  to  your  letter  ol'  the  22d  instant,  and  to  your  pre- 
ceding letter  of  the  15th  instant,  I  would  say,  that  I  regret  you  should 
have  supposed  my  letter  of  the  lltl.  implied  any  reflection  on  the  officers 
of  yous  company,.  Nothing  certainly  was  farther  from  my  intention;  the 
object  of  that  letter  being  to  remove  the  objections  which  you  had  to 
executing1  a  contract,  and  to  show  you  that  two  of  the  three  objections 
which  you  urged  were  removed  by  the  previous  action  of  the  department, 
and  that  they  should  remain  so,  if  desired  by  you,  by  provisions  in  the 
contract.  The  third  point  of  objection  which  you  pressed  is  one  which 
has  come  up  in  our  correspondence  with  many  of  the  rail  road  compa- 
nies; and  with  a]l  of  them  the  department  has  acted  on  the  same  views 
expressed  in  my  letter  of  the  11th  to  you. 

In  your  letters  of  the  15th  and  of  the  2.2d  you  assume  that  the  depart- 
ment discriminates  between  your  company  .and  other  companies,  by  re- 
quiring of  yours  the  execution  x>f  ft  contract  before  payment  can  be  made- 
while  it  has  settled  with  others  without  this  requirement.  I  send  you  a 
copy  of  my  report  of  December  7th,  on  pages  10  and  11  of  which  you 
will  see  the  rule  of  action  of  the  department  stated.  When  I  wrote  you 
on  the  20th,  my  impression  was  that  this  rule  had  been  departed  from  in 
no  case,  as  it  certainly  whs  my  intention  it  should  not  be.  Upon  strict 
examination.  I  find  that  the  only  apparent  departure  from  it  has  been  in 
the  case  of  the  Richmond  and  Fredericksburg  rail  road,  to  which  pay- 
ment has  once  been  made  since  the  1st  of  July  1863,  without  a  contract. 
1  undcrstand'that  was  made  under  the  apprehension  that,  as  the  company 
could  not  perform  the  service  on  the  whole  of 'the  road,  it  was  not  neces 
sary  for  it  to  execute  a  contract.  Tliis  was  a  mistaken  view,  and  that 
company  will  be  required  to  execute  a  contract  as  alt  others  are  required 
to  do  This,  f  am  informed^  was  the  only  case  in  which  a  payment  has 
been  made  without  a  contract  since  the  expiration  of  the  term  of  the 
former  contract*.  These  facts.  I  trust,  will  be  a  sufficient  assurance  to 
you  that  no  discrimination  has  been  made  against  your  company. 
Very  respectfully, 

JOHN  H.  REAGAN,  P.  M.  General 
E,  Fontaine,  hlsq..  Pres.   Va.  Central  H.  R.  Co? 


Extract  from  Report  above  referred  to. 

"  Rail  Road  Service. 

The  department  has  omitted  to  advertise  for  proposals  for  mail  service 
on  rail  road  routes,  because  of  the  fact  that  it  is  authorized,  under  exist- 
ing laws,  to  make  contracts  with  rail  road  companies  without  advertise- 


11 

raent ;  awl  a>  there  can  be  do  competition  for  such  service,  the  effect  o( 
an  advertisement  would  simply  be  to  invite  proposals  for  an  increase  ot 
compensation,  which  could  not  be  granted  unless  the  postal  facilities  fur- 
nished by  the  route  should  have  so  increased  as  to  change  the  classifica- 
tion of  the  road,  under  the  act  approved  May  9th.  186Jf 

Most  of  the  rail  road  president  have  executed  contracts  with  the  de- 
partment for  the  transportation  of  the  mails  from  the  1st  of  July  186'-': 
but  there  are  some  v.  ho  refuse  to  execute  contracts,  although  they  are 
offered  the  maximum  rate  of  compensation  for  the  first  class  roads."  At 
the  same  time  they  express  their  entire  willingness  to  carry  the  mails, 
but  are  unwilling  to  place  their  roads,  and  mail  service  on  them,  under 
even  that  limited  control  of  the  department,  which  is  necessary  to  give 
regularity,  certainty  and  security  to  the  service. 

The  only  remedies  for  the  evils  which  must  result  from  the  transporta- 
tion of  the  mails  without  the  restraining  influence  of  contracts  for  its 
faithful  performance,  which  the  department  can  apply,  arc.  1st.  to  with- 
hold payment  for  services  performed  without  contract:  and  3d,  if  they 
still  refuse  to  contract,  then  to  withdraw  tin*  mails  from  such  roads,  ami 
endeavor  to  obtain  some  other  mode  of  conveyance. 

In  view  of  the  requirements  of  the  lav,  upon  this  subject,  it  will  be 
my  duty  to  apply  these  remedies  to  all  roads  whose  presidents  persist  in 
their  refusal  to  comply  with  the  requirements  of  the  department  in  rela- 
tion to  contracts:  for.  although  the  practice  has  existed,  to  some  extent, 
of  permitting  the  mail  service  to  be  performed  on  rail  roads  without 
tracts,  and  paying  for  such  service  by  what  are  termed  "Orders  of  Re- 
cognition," such  practice  was  clearly  a  violation  of  the  law  which  forbids 
payment  for  mail  service  until  contracts  shall  have  been  execute 
ing  to  law  and  the  regulations  of  the  department. 

Wealthy  corporate  monopolies  should  not  be  permitted  to  occupy  such 
a  position  in  relation  to  the  postal  service  of  tie  country,  on  the  great 
trunk  lines  of  mail  communication,  m  would  place  such  service  com- 
pletely within  their  control,  not  only  upon  the  main  lines,  but  also  upon 
the  numerous  minor  mail  routes  leading  therefrom;  for  of  what  avail 
would  it  be  for  the  department  to  Gnfoi  te  part  of  the  contractors 

upon  these  latter  lines,  a  Btrict  compliance  with  tne  terms  of  their  con- 
tracts in  relation  to  schedules  of  arrivals  and  departures  of  the  mails,  it 
rail  road  lines  are  permitted  to  carry  the  mails  ar  pleasure,  without  tin- 
obligations  of  contracts  to  compel  their  observance  of  fixed  schedules. 

[rreat  not  worn  of  post  mures?  It 
would  be  unjust,  if  the  lav  would  forerate  it.  t«>  relieve  them  ot"  condi- 
tions which  are  required  of  all  other  contractors. 

The  department  has  never  •  •  or  attempted  to  my  other 

authority  over  the  schedules  of  arrivals  ami   d<  •    -if  mail   trains 

upon  rail  reads  than  that  nec(  ssarj   '<>  r       in   conformity 

,vith  schedules  "agreed  on"  between  them  and  the  department;  and 
these  schedules  have  usually,  been  arranged  in  conventions  held  bv  the 
ufliecrs  of  con  no  ting  lines,  so  as  to  obtain  the  trniform  and  alone  sche- 
dules of  connection  required  by  their  own  interests. 

If  any  road,  forming  part  of  a  through  lino  between  important  points, 
be  permitted  to  cany  the  mails  without  executing  proper  contracts  for 
the  faithful  performance  of  such  service,  the  department  will  not  have 
y»e  power  to  prevent  them  from  adopting  any  schedule,  they  may  deem 
best  suited  to  their  local  business,  without  regard  to  their  effect  upon  the 
regularity  of  the  mails  on  their  own  lines,  or  of  their  proper  connection* 
with  others." 


12 

Virginia  Central  Rail  Road, 
President's   Office,  Richmond,  Va.,  May  3,  1864. 
Dear  Sir  : 

Your  letter  of  the  26th  ultimo  was  received  during  ai 
absence  of  several  days  on  the  line  of  the  road. 

I  do  not  propose  to  continue  the  discussion  of  the  subject  of  our  cor- 
respondence, but  desire  to  say  that  I  never  have  objected  to  a  contract 
that  would  enable  you  to  secure  the  important  objects  for  which  yon  say 
in  your  report  contracts  should  be  made,  and  that  no  penalty,  however 
severe,  could  have  made  this  company  more  considerate  of  the  public 
interest  than  they  have  been  without  a  contract.  But  my  objections  tc 
your  mode  of  enforcing-  the  contract,  as  set  forth  in  my  letter  of  the  15tl. 
ultimo,  remain  unchanged.  At  this  critical  juncture  in  our  political 
affairs,  I  have,  neither  time  nor  disposition  t,o  agitate  a  matter  which,  ir 
a,  pecuniary  point  of  view,  is  of  such  trivia]  importance. 

I  shall  therefore  suspend  all  remedial  actions  for  the  present.  I  will 
merely  add,  that  Mr.  Barbour  informed  me  that  he  had  settled  with  tin 
department  without  a  contract,  and  Mr.  Daniel  states  that  he  has  settled 
more  than  once. 

Very  respectfully, 


Hon.  J.  H.  Reagan,  P.  M.  General. 


E.  FONTAINE,   President 


Virginia  Central  Rail  Road, 
General  SupVs  Office,  Richmond.  Va.,  July  28,  1864 
Sir: 

1  am  instructed  by  the  president  of  this  company  to  say  tha?; 
his  duty  to  the  stockholders  will  not  allow  him  to  continue  the  use  of  a 
car  by  you  for  the  mails  and  your  agents,  without  compensation.  The 
mails  have  been  carried  to  the  satisfaction  of  the  public  for  more  than 
twelve  months,  and  you  are  understood  to  refuse  to  pay  any  thing  for  this 
service. 

I  am  required  to  adopt  some  plan  by  which  the  company  will  get  remu- 
neration for  the  use  of  the  large  space  heretofore  occupied  by  your 
department.  At  the  same  time  the  president  has  no  desire  to  punish  the 
people  of  Virginia  and  the  soldiers  of  our  army,  by  rejecting  the  mail, 
even  though  you  persist  in  what  he  regards  your  course  of  injustice. 

If  the  existing  difficulties  are  not  settled,  on  and  after  the  1st  of  Au- 
gust I  shall  demand  of  all  your  agents  the  payment  of  the  usual  fare  for 
first  class  passengers,  where  they  travel  with  the  mail,  and  shall  alfc- 
limit  the  space  to  be  occupied  by  the  mail. 

I  am  instructed  by  the  president,  however,  to  say  that  he  is  now,  as  he 
always  has  been,  willing  to  sign  any  reasonable  and  proper  contract, 


IB 

which  will  preclude  the  unlimited  ii  ruction  heretofore  exer- 

cised by  the  department,  which  ii  m  to  decline  signing  the  one 

offered  by  you . 

Very  respectfully, 

Youi  servant, 

D.  WHITCQMB,   Gen.  Sup. 
Hon.  J.  H.  Reagan,  P.  M.  General. 


Richmond,  July  29,  1864. 

Sir: 

T  h  i  general  to  acknowledge 

the  receipt  of  your  letfe  Mate  thai  it  was  his 

impression  that  the  principal  objection  advanced  by  Mr,  Fontaine,  presi- 
dent of  the  Virginia  Ceu  g  . - r  t  1m  conditions  which  have 
always  tyeeia  embraced  in*rail  mad  contract*  made  witli  this  department 
(and  which  arc  identical  ifi  every  particular  with  those  ased  in  the  United 
States  post  office  department  from  the  eontmenoeineut  of  rail  road  trans- 
portation of  mails),  bad  rily  met  by  him  in  the  ooireopoB- 
dence  between  them.  A-  tin  I  existing  with  Mr.  Fontaine 
are  not  pointed  our  in  your  not*-,  and  are  no?  understood  in  their  precise 
force  by  the  department  !  take  the  .liberty  of  enclosing  a  blank  form  of 
contract,  with  the  request  that  you  immediately  submit  the  same  to  the 
president,  and  have  him  nterlines  the  conditions  therein  so  as 
to  conform  to  his  wishes,  in  order  that  v  be  considered  by  the 
postmaster  general. 

Respectfully, 

H.  ST.  GEO.  OFffUTT, 

*  Chiej  Bureau. 

H.  D.  Whitcomb,  i\  R.  R. 


Beaverdam,  July  30,  1864. 
Dear  Sir: 

You'  me  from  Mr.  Offutt,  is  received,  in 

which  he  requests  me  to  repeat  my  objections  to  signing  the  contract 
which  the  post  office  department  has  prepared.  I  informed  the  postmas- 
ter general,  in  mv  fast  letter  on  the  subject,  that  my  Objections  were  not 
ried,  and  that  T  delayed  action  because  just  at  that  time  the  very 
critical  condition  of  the  country  made  it  inopportune  to  dp 

My  objections  are  the  same  winch  have  been  -dated  before,  and  if  I  am 
correctly  informed,  are  entertained  by  many  others  besides  myself.  It  is 
true  that  the  provisions  are  identical  with  those  contained  in  the  contracts 
of  the  old  government;  but  the  powers  claimed  under  these  provisions  and 


14 

the  practice  of  the  department  is  very  different,  otherwise  there  would 
have  heen  no  complaint. 

1st.  I  object  to  the  broad  power  exercised  by  the  postmaster  general. 
of  giving  his  own  interpretation  to  the  contract,  deciding  for  himself 
without  appeal,  when  the  contract  is  not  complied  with.  Immediately 
connected  therewith,  I  object  to  his  practice  of  exacting  the  payment  of 
a  fine,  under  the  rigid  enforcement  of  the  letter  of  the  contract,  when  it 
is  shown  that  there  was  no  dereliction  of  duty,  but  the  company  was  pre- 
vented from  doing  what  was  demanded,  by  causes  over  which  they  had 
no  control,  as  in  the  case  of  the  appropriation  of  the  whole  motive  power 
of  the  company,  by  authority  of  the  war  department,  at  some  critical 
moment,  for  public  defence.  In  view  of  this  practice,  and  the  exercise 
of  the  sole  right  of  interpretation,  the  company  must  have  some  protec- 
tion against  the  possible  abuse  of  powers  which  may  be  claimed  under 
clauses  1,  5,  6  and  7. 

2d.  The  first  article  gives  the  "exclusive  ilse"  of  the  mail  apartment 
to  "  the  department  and  its  mail  agent."  The  postmaster  genera]  ha? 
conceded  that  it  is  proper  that  some  officers  of  theocom^any-should  be 
allowed  to -travel  in  this  car,  to  see  that  no  nse  ii  m&de  «»f  it  net  con- 
templated by  a  proper  interpretation  of  the  contract,  and  nevertheless  he 
refuses  admission  to  the  directors  of  the  company,  who,  together  with  tit. e 
president,  are  the  only  specially  appointed  guardians  of  its  interests. 

3d.  Upon  the  ex  parte  report  of  some  subordinate,  ffefe enters  np  finer, 
without  notification  of  the  charge;  ;<rid  the  contractor. only  knows  tha-c 
he  is  considered  subject  to  the  line,  when  he  comes  to  Settle  for  his  mail 
service.  This  is  contrary  to  the  practice  of  the  old  government,  whose 
f  >rm  of  contract  has  been  literally  copied.  It  is  in  violation  of  the  com- 
mon principles  of  justice.  It  is  like  condemning-  a  man  to  be  hung,  ami 
not  giving  him  an  opportunity  for  defence  until  the  day  of  his  execution. 

My  objections  are  entertained  more  against  the  principle  of  giving 
powers  which  may  be  abused,  than  on  account  of  the  pecuniary  amount 
involved. 

I  do  not  know  whether  interlineation  will  correct  these  objections.  I 
will,  however,  examine  to  see;  but  I  desire  you  to  show  this  to  Mr. 
OfFutt,  and  hope  he  will  recognize  the  justice  of  providing  for  the  points 
of  objection. 

I  can  never  consent  to  have  the  directors  excluded  from  the  mail  car : 
and  there  must  be  some  restraint  on  the  power  of  fining  without  notice, 
when  there  is  good  cause  for  the  alleged  delinquencies.  If  this  is  done 
I  will  be  satisfied.  1  think  there  should  be  some  mode  pointed  out  for 
settling  differences,  say — a  reference  to  the  secretary  of  war,  or  a  hoarder 
referees.  I  will  now  see  what  I  can  do  on  the  contract  sent,  by  inter- 
lining the  suggested  modifications. 

Very  respectful!)-, 

E.  FONTAINE. 
H.  D.  Whitcomb,  Esq. 


15 
/ 

Post  Office  Departmem. 
m     Richmond,  August  1,  1P(>4. 
Sir: 

On  the  28th  of  July  ultimo,  I  received  from  H.  D.  Whit- 
oomb,  Esq.,  general  superintendent  of  the  Virginia  Central  rail  road,  a 
letter  which  appears  to  have  been  written  by  yonr  direction,  in  which  he 
says,  MI  am  instructed  by  the  president  of  the  company  to  say  that  him 
duty  to  the  stockholders  will  not  allow  him  to  continue  the  nee  of  a  car 
by  you  for  the  mails  and  your  agents  without  compensation.  The  mail? 
have  been  carried  to  the  satisfaction  of  the  public  for  more  than  twelve 
months,  and  you  arc;  understood  to  refuse  to % pay  any  thing  for  this  ser- 
vice. T  am  required  to  adopt  some  plan  bv  which  the  company  will  get 
remuneration  for  the  large  space  heretofore  occupied  by  your  department. 
At  the  same  time  the  president  has  do  de-ire  to  punish  the  people  of 
Virginia  and  the  soldiers  of  onr  army  by  rejecting  the  mail,  even  though 
you  persist  in  what  he  regards  yonr  course  of •  injustice. 

"If  the  existing  difficulties  are  not  settled,  on  and  after  the  first  of 
August  I  shall  demand  of  all  your  agents  the  payment  of  the  usual  fare 
for  first  class  passengers,  when  they  travel  with  the  mail,  and  shall  also 
Mmit  the  space  to  be  occupied  by  the  mail. 

"  I  am  also  instructed  by  the  president,  however,  to  say  that  he  is  now, 
as  he  always  has  been  willing  to  sign  any  reasonable  and  proper  contract, 
which  will  preclude  the  unlimited  right  of  construction  heretofore  exer- 
jfaed  by  the  department,  which  induced  him  to  decline  signing  the 
offered  by  you." 

In  answer  to  this,  and  pursuant  to  my  instructions,  the  chief  of  tin- 
contract  bureau  of  this  department  on  the  same  day  inclosed  t<»  Super- 
intendent Whitcomb  a  blank  copy  of  a  contract,  with  the  request  that  he 
submit  it  to  you  for  such  interlineations  and  modifications  as  would  meet 
your  views,  in  order  that  we  might  have  a  precise  view  of  your  objections 
to  the  form  of  contract  which  is  used  by  this  department,  and  has  been 
signed  by  the  officers  of  the  other  rail  road  companies  of  the  Confederacy 
generally,  a  copy  of  which  was  sent  you  for  execution  on  the  seventh  of 
September  1863.  On  this  morning  Mr.  Whitcomb  returned  this  form  of 
contract,  with  your  notes  and  interlineations,  accompanied  by  a  letter 
from  you  to  him,  in  which  you  restate  your  objections  to  signing  a  con- 
tract in  the  usual  form;  and  in  his  note  he  says,  "Trusting  that  this  dis- 
agreeable subject  will  soon  be  satisfactorily  settled,  I  shall  not  issue  the 
order  relative  to  the  agents  of  the  department,  unless  farther  directions 
ire  given  me." 

Your  objections  to  signing  the  usual  form  of  contract  made  with  rail 
road  companies  are  substantially  the  same  which  you  have  heretofore 
submitted  to  the  department,  and  my  answer  must  be  substantially  the 
same  that  I  have  heretofore  made  you  in  several  communications  on  this 
subject. 


16 

The  form  of  contract  used  by  this  department  is  the  one  which  h*a=- 
been  used  with  every  rail  road*ompany  which  has  contracted  to  carry 
the  mails  for  the  Confederate  States  since  the  organization  of  our  govern- 
ment; and  it  is  a  literal  copy,  in  all  its  conditions,  of  the  form  of  con- 
tract which  had  been  used  by  the  government  of  the  United  States  for 
many  years  before  the  organization  of  our  government.  But  you  say 
that  it  is  more  to  the  construction  of  the  contract  and  the  action  of  the 
department,  to  which  you  object,  than  the  form  of  the  contract.  The 
same  rule  of  construction  of  these  contracts  and  the  practice  under 
them,  prevail  in  this  department  which  prevailed  under  the  old  govern- 
ment; and  the  same  rules  and  practice  are  applied  to  the  road  of"  which 
you  are  president,  that  are  applied  to  all  other  roads  in  the  Confederate 
States. 

You  make  substantially  three  objections  to  signing  the  usual  contract 
with  the  department  : 

1st.  That  the  department  claims  the  exclusive  use  and  control  of  the 
mail  cars. 

2d.  That  the  department  makes  deductions  from  the  mail  pay  of  the 
company  for  services  not  performed  by  it. 

•id.  That  the  department  makes  deductions  and  imposes  fines  for  non- 
performance of  service,  without  notice  to  the  rail  road  companies  pre- 
vious to  the  settlement  of  their  quarterly  accounts. 

I.  In  answer  to  your  first  objection,  I  would  say  that  you  were  advised 
by  my  letter  of  the  8th  of  July  1863,  and  by  a  subsequent  letter  of  the 
11th  of  April  1864,  "that  the  rule  excluding  all  persons  from  the  mail 
cars  had  been  so  far  modified,  and  corresponding  directions  given  to  our 
agents  on  all  rail  roads,  as  to  allow  the  presidents  and  superintendents 
of  rail  roads  to  travel  in  the  mail  cars  when  they  wished  to  do  so,  and 
that  conductors  should  at  all  times  be  allowed  to  pass  through  and  examine 
the  mail  cars,  to  prevent  any  thing  improper  from  being  conveyed  in 
them." 

After  you  were  notified  of  this  modification  of  the  rule  of  the  depart- 
ment admitting  presidents  and  superintendents  of  rail  roads  to  ride  in  the 
mail  cars,  you  set  up  a  claim  that  the  same  privilege  should  be  allowed  , 
the  directors  of  the  road  of  which  you  are  president.  It  is  proper  to  say 
that  such  a  claim  has  not  been  made  in  behalf  of  the  directors  of  any 
other  road  in  the  Confederacy. 

The  department  is  not  advised  of  the  number  of  the  directors  of  your 
road,  nor  of  the  frequency  of  the  trips  they  might  wish  to  make  in  the 
mail  cars ;  nor  can  it  know  how  many  of  them  might  present  themselves 
for  passage  in  the  mail  cars  at  any  one  trip,  nor  whether  the  mail  cars 
would  have  sufficient  capacity  to  convey  the  mails  and  all  the  persons  for 
?riiom  you  claim  this  privilege.  While  the  official  character  of  the  per- 
sons for  whom  the  privilege  is  required  might  be  regarded  as  a  sufficient 
guarantee  of  the  security  of  the  mails  against  depredation,  it  must  be 


17 

remembered  that  it  is  also  essential  that  the  mail  agent  shall  have  suffi 
cient  room  to  empty  the  mail  bags,  assort,  distribute  and  rebag  the  mail 
matter.     This  he  cannot  do  in  a  car  occupied  by  numerous  passengers 
And  the  department  cannot  consent  that  the  postal  service  shall  be  ren 
dered  liable  to  interruption  from  such  a  cause.     If  this  last  demanded 
concession  were  made,  what  assurance  has  the  depart uient  that  a  demand 
will  not  follow  for  the  same  privilege  for  all  the  stockholders  of  the  road  7 
And  why  not  for  them  as  well  as  for  the  directors  ?     There  is  at  lea- 
much  reason  to  expect  this  as  there  was  to  expect  that,  when  you 
been  informed  that  the  president  and  superint- ud<nts  of  rail  roads  were 
ro  he  allowed  to  ride  in  the  mail  cars,  you  would  then  demand,  as  a  con- 
dition, that  the  directors  and  treasurer  should  have  the  same  privilege,  or 
you  would  cease  to  carry  the  mails.     If  this  privilege  should  be  extended 
to  the  directors  of  your  road,  a  like  privilege  must  be  extended  to  the 
directors  of  all  other  companies.     I  cannot  consent  to  this  extension  of 
the  rule  against  the  admission  of  unsworn  aud  unauthorized  persons  into 
the  mail  cars,  as  well  because  of  the  embarrassment  which  such  a  course 
would  probably  entail  on  the  agents  of  the  department  and  the  postal 
service,  as  because  it  would  be  a  clear  and  manifest  violation  of  the  spirit 
of  the  law.  looking  to  the  security  of  the  mails,  thus  to  expose  them  to 
the  forbearance  of  Whole  classes  of  persons,  who,  if  they  did  not  them 
selves  interfere  with  them,  would,  by  their  presence,  destroy  the  respon- 
sibility of  our  agents,  by  putting  it  in  their  power,  in  case  of  loss  or  im 
propriety,  to  say  that  there  were  so  many  other  they  could  not 

be  held  responsible  for  a  wrong  which  it  was  equally  in  the  power  of  any 
one  of  them  to  have  committed. 

II.  In  answer  to  your  second  objection,  I  hu\-  to  say.  as  I  have  here- 
tofore said  to  you,  that  the  department  contracts  for  the  carrying  of  the 
mails  a  specified  number  of  trips,  upon  a  schedule  of  arrivals  and  depar- 
tures agreed  on.  ft  pays  for  the  trips  of  tervjoe  performed,  and  refuse 
to  pay  for  service  not  performed.     The  pr<  •  >n  which  this  objee 

tion  is  based  are,  that  on  occasions  the  "whoi.  motive  power  of  the 
[your]  company"  is  appropriated,  "by  authority  of  the  war  depart 
ment,"  by  which  you  are  prevented  from  carrying  the  mails.  In  such  a 
case  the  department  refuses  to  pay  you  for  the  lerfiee  which  fob  do  not 
perform,  and  for  which  you  insist  the  company  ought  to  be  paid.  Why  1 
Your  "  whole  motive  power"  is  employed,  by  the  authority  of  the  war 
department,  in  the  service  of  that  department,  and  not  in  the  postal  ser- 
vice ;  and  the  war  department  pays  your  company  for  that  service.  Upon 
what  principle  do  you  demand  also  to  be  paid  by  the  post  office  depart- 
ment for  service  which  there  is  no  pretension  of  your  having  performed, 
and  when  the  war  department  was  paying  you  for  the  use  of  your  "  whole 
motive  power  ?"  The  rule  of  this  department,  under  which  it  refuses  to 
pay  you  for  what  you  never  did,  is  applied  to  all  other  companies  just  a* 
it  is  to  yours,  and  seems  to  me  so  manifestly  just  that  I  must  express  my 
3 


18 

surprise  that  it  should  be  seriously  questioned  in  its  application  to  such 
a  state  of  facts. 

III.  In  answer  to  your  third  objection,  I  would  say,  that  under  the 
laws  and  regulations  relating  to  the  postal  service,  and  under  the  contract 
and  accompanying  schedules  of  arrivals  and  departures  of  the  mails,  a 
failure  of  the  mails  cannot  occur  on  your  road  without  the  knowledge  of 
your  officers  and  agents ;  and  it  is  made  the  duty  of  all  mail  contractors, 
on  the  occurrence  of  failures,  to  render  a  specific  excuse,  setting  forth 
particularly  the  cause  of  failure,  as  will  be  seen  by  reference  to  chapter 
33  of  the  Regulations  of  the  Department,  which  was  in  force  for  many 
years  in  the  United  States  before  its  adoption  by  us.  If  failures  occur, 
and  the  contractor,  with  full  knowledge  of  the  fact  and  of  the  necessity 
of  rendering  an  excuse  for  it,  fails  to  do  so,  the  department  proceeds  to 
make  its  deductions  on  the  settlement  of  the  quarterly  account  of  the 
contractor.  But  in  the  case  of  rail  roads,  the  department  has  so  far 
modified  this  rule,  as  you  were  informed  in  my  letter  of  April  11,  1864, 
as  to  furnish  the  companies,  on  the  settlement  of  their  accounts,  with  a 
statement  of  any  failures  which  may  have  occurred,  and  for  which  de- 
ductions have  been  made,  giving  the  dates  and  places  at  which  the 
failures  occurred.  And  the  department  consents  afterwards  to  reopen 
the  account,  if  the  company  wishes  to  present  evidence  to  excuse  its 
failures.  But,  in  such  cases  an  account  will  only  be  reopened  when  it 
appears  that  the  company  might  have  been  taken  by  surprise  by  the  action 
of  the  department,  or  when,  from  any  other  cause,  manifest  injustice 
would  be  done  the  company  by  a  refusal  to  reopen  the  account.  In  a 
simple  case  of  neglect  or  refusal  on  the  part  of  the  company  to  send  in 
the  necessary  excuse  at  the  proper  time,  when  it  had  knowledge  of  the 
failure  and  of  the  necessity  for  the  excuse,  the  account  would  not  be  re- 
opened, and  the  deduction  would  be  required  to  stand. 

I  enclose  to  you  herewith,  a  copy  of  the  circular  sent  by  this  depart 
inent  to  contractors  whenever  deductions  have  been  made  from  their  pay, 
stating  the  amount  of  deductions  and  dates  of  the  failures  for  which  they 
are  made,  and  setting  forth  the  rules  and  reasons  on  which  these  deduc- 
tions are  made.  I  also  send  you  herewith,  a  copy  of  the  circular  sent  by 
the  department  to  all  contractors  on  whom  fines  are  imposed,  stating  the 
amount  of  the  fines  and  the  dates  of  the  delinquencies  for  which  they  are 
imposed,  and  giving  the  rules  and  reasons  for  exacting  them.  The  rules 
on  which  fines  are  imposed  and  deductions  made,  and  the  practice  of  the 
department  under  them,  have  the  sanction  of  long  use  and  the  approval 
of  a  long  line  of  postmasters  general  under  the  old  government,  as  well 
as  of  the  uniform  practice  of  this  government  for  more  than  three  years. 
T  have  carefully  considered  your  objections  to  them,  but  can  see  no  rea- 
son which  calls  for  a  change,  and  must  adhere,  in  the  case  of  your  road 
*8  well  as  of  all  others,  to  the  existing  regulations  and  practice. 

In  your  letter  you  propose  the  creation  of  a  new  tribunal  to  settle  dif- 


19 

ferences  of  opinion  between  the  department  and  its  cont;  rh»s 

would  require  the  actiou  of  the  legislative  department  of  the  govern 
ment,  if  any  were  necessary.     There  is  no  complaint  or  pretence  th.n. 
the  department  fails  or  refuses  to  pay  contractors  for  all  tie  per 

formed  by  them.     But  your  complaint  is  that  the  department  refuses  ftp 
pay  your  company  for  service  which  it  doe.-*  not  perforin,  and  when  it  is 
receiving  pay  from  another  department  of  the  government  for  the  nse  of 
its  "whole  motive  power,"  to  the  exclusion  of  the  mail;-.     Thi*  is  ■ 
question  of  rules  or  practice  of  so  doubtful  import  u  to  give  nee  to  «1 1 f 
ferences  of  opinion,  which  might  be  adjusted  by  an  appellate  tribunal, 
but  is  simply  a  question  as  to  whether  the  department,  in  discard  of 
the  laws  and  regulations  for  its  government  ami  of  the  terms  el  the  nan 
tract  with  its  carrier,  should  pay  for  service  never  performed,     l!   i-> 
proper  to  say,  however,  that  if,  in   the  settlement  of  the  aeeoantl  «>t  ;: 
contractor  by  this  department,  he  believes  utjastiee  ha-   been  nana  him 
he  has  the  right  of  appeal  from  the  auditor  to  the  comptroller,  where  be 
ean  have  a  rehearing  and  I  n   examination  <•  I  lii-  u  tlw  pro- 

vision made  by  law  to  secure  both  contractors  and  the  department  against 
errors  of  decision,  or  disregard  of  law  and  the  provision-  ol  eontratrf 
the  officers  or  parties  concerned  :  and  I  have  no  authority,  if  1  - apj 
it  proper  to  do  so,  to  agree  to  any  other  appellate  tribunal. 

Another  point  preseuted  in  the  notice  of  Superintend. -in  \\  bitooaib,  i> 
that  unless  the  department  shall  pay  your  compam  i<»r  tl ••  pev 

formed  since  the  first  of  July  1863,  it  will  refuse  o>  i  arrj  th<   mails. 

The  department  found  it  necessary  to  insist  that  the  rail  road  eompa- 
nies  should  enter  into  contract  with  it,  in  order  to  gK<-  il  th<-  necessary 
power  to  control  the  schedules  and  give  regularity  and  reliability  t<»  aV 
mails.  Where  companies,  as  was  the  case  with  yours,  refuse  to  enter 
into  contracts  and  thus  to  become  amenable  to  the  laws  and  regulations 
governing  the  service,  our  only  alternative  Wtm  ro  refuse  payment  to  meti 
companies  for  service  until  they  should  consent  to  enter  Into  the  usual 
contract.  You  have  been,.  I  believe,  repeatedly  notified  that  whenever 
you  should  enter  into  contract  with  the  department,  your  peat  service 
would  be  recognized  and  your  company  paid,  and  that  you  would  not  be 
paid  until  such  contract  was  made.  I  now  repeat  that  I  shall  not  autho- 
rise payment  to  your  company  until  it  shall  enter  into  contract.  But  if 
it  chooses  to  enter  into  the  usual  contract.  I  will  then  recognize  its  past 
service,  and  direct  payment  to  be  made  for  it.  The  question  is  not  fairly 
presented  when  you  say  you  will  not  carry  the  mails  longer,  unless  the 
department  pay  you  for  past  services.  You  have  from  the  first  been  noti- 
fied that' the  department  would  not  pay  you  for  service  nplesfl  you  wooM 
enter  into  contract*  On  receiving  that  notice,  it  was  at  your  option  to 
refuse  or  to  continue  to  carry  the  mails.  If  you  chose  to  go  on,  the  de- 
partment had  the  right  to  expect  that  you  intended  to  enter  into  contract 
as  it  required. 


20 

Altogether,  you  insist  on  a  change  of  the  Rules  and  Regulations  of  the 
Department  to  suit  your  views.  You  demand,  as  a  condition  absolute  to 
your  continuance  to  carry  the  mails,  that  the  department  shall  allow  you 
to  determine  who  shall  ride  in  the  mail  cars — a  demand  which  it  is  not 
probable  was  ever  before  made  in  the  history  of  rail  road  service,  and 
which  has  certainly  not  been  made  by  any  company  in  the  Confederate 
States.  And  you  demand  pay  for  service  which  you  do  not  pretend  to 
have  performed,  and  say  you  will  not  continue  to  carry  the  mails,  unless 
the  department  will  consent  to  pay  you  for  past  service  without  your  en- 
tering into  contract.  This  department  cannot  concede  any  of  these  de- 
mands, as  you  have  been  repeatedly  informed.  If,  upon  these  facts,  you 
choose  to  refuse  to  carry  the  mails,  it  only  remains  for  the  department  to 
provide  the  next  best  service  it  can,  and  to  notify  the  public  that  you 
refuse  to  carry  the  mails  for  the  government  and  people  on  the  terms 
and  conditions  on  which  they  are  carried  by  all  other  rail  roads,  and  be- 
cause the  department  will  not  yield  to  your  demand  of  stipulations  and 
conditions  which  are  unlawful,  against  sound  policy,  and  one  of  them 
unconscionable. 

The  course  you  propose  to  adopt  is  one  which  must  so  seriously  affect 
the  interests  of  the  people  at  large  and  of  the  government  and  army,  that 
[  would  respectfully  request  that  you  consent  to  submit  the  matter  to  your 
board  of  directors  before  you  take  final  action,  and  allow  them  to  examine 
the  whole  correspondence  between  us,  a  full  copy  of  which  I  will  have 
prepared  for  the  purpose,  if  you  request  it. 

Very  respectfully, 

JOHN  H.  REAGAN,  P.  M.   General^ 
E,  Fontaine,  Esq,.  Pre*.  Va.  Central  R.  R.  Co. 


Confederate  States  of  America, 
Post  Office  Department,  186 

SlU: 

A  deduction  of  $  has  been  made  from  your  pay,  as 

contractor  on  Route  No.  ,  for 

This  has  been  done  upon  the  principle,  expressly  stated  in  the  adver- 
tisement for  proposals,  and  inserted  in  all  the  contracts  of  this  depart- 
ment for  the  transportation  of  the  mails,  that  "in  all  cases  there  is  to  be 
a  forfeiture  of  the  pay  of  the  trip  when  the  trip  is  not  run." 

You  are  reminded  of  the  necessity  of  prom/ptly  forwarding  to  this  office 
any  excuse  which  you  may  desire  to  offer  for  a  failure  or  delinquency, 
and  that  "a  specific  excuse"  is  required,  and  "general  allegations"  are 
not  admitted.  It  is  also  important,  where  an  excuse  is  tendered  for 
having  failed  to  perform  a  trip  or  half  trip,  that  you  state  in  it  whether 
any,  and  if  any,  what  effort  was  made  to  perform  the  service. 

To  entitle  an  excuse  for  any  failure  or  delinquency  to  be  considered, 
it  is  required  that  the  facts  stated  in  it  be  in  all  cases  verified  by  the 


affidavit  of  the  person  having  a  personal  knowledge  of  them,  or  by  the 
official  certificate  of  a  postmaster. 

If,  after  waiting  a  reasonable  time,  no  specific  and  satisfactory  excuse 
be  received,  the  case  will  be  presented  to  the  postmaster  general  for  his 
action,  and  no  fine  or  deduction  will  be  remitted  on  any  excuse  rendered 
after  the  decision  is  made. 

Very  respectfully,  your  obedient  servant. 

,  in  charge  of  Inspection  Office. 


[No.  3.] 

Confederate  States  of  America. 
Post  Office  Depart  186 

Sir: 

The  postmaster  general  has  adopted  the  following  Regula 
tions  for  the  government  of  this  office,  viz  : 

"Inasmuch  as  failures  to  arrive  ;»t  the  end  of  their  routes  and  other 
points  within  contract  time  cannot  but  be  known  in  all  eases  to  contrac- 
tors or  their  agents,  it  cannot  be  necessary  to  give  them  information 
thereof  when  reported  by  postmasters;  and  it  is  considered  their  duty  to 
send  to  the  department  forthwith  thfir  excuses  for  such  failures,  if  any 
they  have:  Therefore, 

Ordered,  That  no  notice  be  riven  to  contractors  of  failures  to  arrive 
at  any  post  office  in  contract  time  at  d  by  postmasto 

department;  and  if  no  6X0*86  be  received  from  them  within  a  reasonable 

time,  the  chief  clerk  is  directed  to  present  the  case  thus  reported  to  the 
postmaster  general  for  fine. 

Ordered,  That  a  specific  excuse  be  required  for  each  specific  delin- 
quency of  any  contractor,  and  that  general  allegations  be  not  admitted 
If  bad  roads  he  alleged,  a  specific  report  must  be  made  of  what  portion 
of  the  road  was  so  bad  as  to  obstruct  the  mails,  and  what  was  its  pecu- 
liar condition.  If  high  water,  it  must  be  shown  what  watercourses  were 
impassable;  and  so  of  all  other  excuses." 

Should  you  at  any  time  fail  to  arrive  at  the  end  of  your  route,  or  any 
intermediate  post  office,  where  time  of  arrival  is  fixed,  within  the  time 
specified  in  your  contract  or  schedule,  it  will  be  expected  of  you  inline 
diately,  by  yourself  or  agent,  to  send  your  excuse  to  this  office,  setting 
forth  particularly  the  cause  of  your  failure,  and  what  effort,  if  any,  was 
made  to  perform  the  trip,  together  with  the  exact  dates  and  number  of 
the  route;  and  if,  after  waiting  a  reasonable  line,  no  specific  and  satis- 
factory excuse  be  received,  the  case  will  be  presented  to  the  postmaster 
general  for  fine ;  and  no  fine  or  deduction  will  be  remitted  on  any  excuse 
rendered  after  the  decision  is  made. 

You  have  been  fined  $ 

for  failures  at 
on  Route  No.  on  the 

Very  respectfully,  your  obedient  servant, 

,  in  charge  of  Inspection  Office. 


22 

Virginia  Central  Rail  Road, 
General  SupVs  Office,  Richmond,  Va.,  Aug.  4,  1864. 
Sir; 

I  respectfully  ask  the  return  of  the  original  letter  of  the  pre- 
sident, addressed  to  me,  relating  to  the  proposed  contract.  I  kept  no 
copy.  I  will  send  a  copy  to  you  if  desired,  or  you  can  take  one,  as  you 
think  best. 

I  have  read  the  letter  of  the  postmaster  general  to  the  president  of 
this  company,  and  observe,  with  extreme  surprise,  the  following  passage : 

k'  Another  point  presented  in  the  notice  of  Superintendent  Whitcomb 
is,  that  unless  the  department  shall  pay  your  company  for  the  services 
performed  since  the  1st  of  July  1863,  it  will  refuse  to  carry  the  mails." 

I  have  carefully  read  over  my  "notice"  to  the  postmaster  general,  and 
feel  compelled  to  say  that  no  such  threat  is  contained  in  that  document, 
and  no  language  is  used  which  would  warrant  such  a  construction.  On 
the  contrary,  I  stated  that  "the  president  has  no  desire  to  punish  the 
people  of  Virginia,  &c,  by  rejecting,  the  mail,  even  though  you  persist 
in  what  be  regards  your  course  of  injustice." 

Very  respectfully, 

Your  obedient  servant, 

H.  D.  WHITCOMB,  Gen.  SupU 

H.  St.  Geo.  Offutt,  Esq.,  Chief  Contract  Bureau. 


Post  Office  Department, 

Richmond,  August  4,  1864. 
Sir: 

Mr.  Offutt,  the  chief  of  the  contract  bureau,  has  handed  me 
your  letter  of  this  date,  in  which  you  say : 

"  I  have  read  the  letter  of  the  postmaster  general  to  the  president  of 
this  company,  and  observe,  with  extreme  surprise,  the  following  passage : 

"  'Another  point  presented  in  the  notice  of  Superintendent  Whitcomb 
is,  that  unless  the  department  shall  pay  your  company  for  the  services 
performed  since  the  1st  of  July  1863,  it  will  refuse  to  carry  the  mails.* 

"I  have  carefully  read  over  my  'notice'  to  the  postmaster  general, 
and  feel  compelled  to  say  that  no  such  threat  is  contained  in  that  docu- 
ment, and  no  language  is  used  which  would  warrant  such  a  construction. 
On  the  contrary,  I  stated  the  president  has  no  desire  to  punish  the  peo- 
ple of  Virginia,  &c,  by  rejecting  the  mail,  even  though  you  persist  in 
what  lie  regards  your  course  of  injustice." 

In  your  notice  above  referred  to,  you  say  : 

"  I  am  instructed  by  the  president  of  this  company  to  say  that  his  duty 
to  the  stockholders  will  not  allow  him  to  continue  the  use  of  a  car  by  you 


23 

for  the  mails  and  your  agents,  without  compensation."  And  further  on 
you  say,  "If  the  existing  difficulties  are  not  settled,  on  and  after  the  1st 
of  August  I  shall  demand  of  all  your  agents  the  payment  of  the  usual 
fare  of  first  class  passengers,  when  they  travel  with  the  mail,  and  shall 
also  limit  the  space  to  be  occupied  by  the  mails." 

I  quoted  the  whole  of  your  notice,  including  the  above  passages,  in  im\ 
letter  to  the  president  of  the  company,  which  you  say  you  have  read.  1 
now  italicise  these  passages,  to  call  your  attention  specially  to  them,  h 
is  my  duty  to  say  that  your  notice  would  convey  to  any  stranger  to  this 
discussion  the  impression  that  this  department  had  refused,  and  was  re- 
fusing to  pay  the  company  for  the  service  it  had  performed  and  was  per- 
forming, and  that  in  consequence  of  this,  you  proposed  to  refuse  to  carry 
the  mails,  unless  payment  was  made.  Now,  the  truth  is — and  I  inppoM 
you  have  all  the  time  been  fully  aware  of  it— that  this  department  is  now. 
and  has  all  the  time  been  willing  and  anxious  to  pay  your  company  for 
all  the  service  it  has  performed  or  may  perform,  if  it  would  enter  into  tin- 
usual  contract.  And  a  further  truth  is,  that  you  proposed  by  your  notice 
to  compel  the  department  to  pay  your  compauy  without  its  having  entered 
into  contract. 

The  terms  of  contract  between  the  department  and  rail  road  compa- 
nies require,  "that  the  mails  shall  be  conveyed  in  a  secure  and  safe  man- 
ner, free  from  wet  or  other  injury,  in  a  separate  and  convenient  car,  or 
apartment  of  a  car,  suitably  fitted  up.  famished,  warmed  and  lighted, 
under  direction  of  the  post  office  department,  and  to  the  satisfaction  oi 
the  postmaster  general,  or  of  his  authorized  special  agent,  at  the  ex} 
of  the  contractor,  for  the  assorting  and  safe-keeping  of  the  mail,  and  t«.r 
the  exclusive  use  of  the  department  and  its  mail  agent;  and  such  agent 
shall  be  conveyed  free  of  charge." 

Aud  "that  the  company  shall  convey,  free  of  charge,  *  *  *  *  * 
all  accredited  special  agents  of  the  department,  on  the  exhibition  of  their 
credentials." 

I  did  not  profess  to  give  your  language  when  I  said  your  notice  w.i-  i 
refusal  to  continue  to  carry  the  mails,  unless  the  department  would  pay 
the  company  for  past  services,  rendered  without  a  contract,  and  with  no- 
tice that  it  would  not  pay  for  service  without  a  contract. 

You  say  such  was  not  the  language  or  meaning  of  your  notice.  But 
you  cannot  be  ignorant  of  the  fact  that  this  department  could  not  send 
its  mails  along  your  road  by  a  "  passenger,"  which  you  proposed  to  con- 
sider its  agent,  or  without  the  room  and  facilities  required  for  the  security 
and  distribution  of  the  mails,  and  under  circumstances  which  would 
exclude  the  department  from  the  exclusive  control  of  the  necessary  room 
and  facilities  to  enable  it  to  have  the  service  performed.  When  you 
refuse  to  allow  the  department  the  means  and  facilities  for  carrying  the 
mails,  and  refuse  to  enter  into  the  usual  and  necessary  contract  to  enable 
it  to  carry  them  on  your  road,  whatever  ingenuity  of  language  yon  em- 


24 

ploy  to  avoid  the  responsibility  of  a  refusal  to  carry  the  mails*  I  am 
authorized  and  bound  to  regard  such  action  as  a  refusal  to  carry  the 
mails.  If  we  cannot  agree  as  to  the  effect  of  your  notice,  the  public 
must,  in  case  of  necessity,  judge  between  us.  I  chose  to  consider  and 
act  on  the  meaning  and  effect  of  your  notice,  in  view  of  the  precedent, 
facts  and  necessary  consequences  which  must  flow  from  it,  and  not  to 
spend  time  in  discussing  the  question  as  to  whether  depriving  the  depart- 
ment of  the  means  to  carry  the  mails  on  your  road,  and  refusing  to  carry 
them  under  a  contract  which  would  subject  the  company  to  the  laws  and 
regulations  which  provide  for  the  security  of  the  mails  and  the  regularity 
of  the  service,  was  or  was  not  a  refusal  to  carry  the  mails. 

Very  respectfully, 

JOHN  H.  KEAGAN,  P.  AT.   General. 

H.  D.  Whitco?nb,  Esq.,  Gen,  Supt.  Va.  Central  R.  R. 


Richmond,  Va,,  August  9,  1864. 
Sir: 

Below  I  send  you  a  copy  of  an  order  from  Mr,  Whitcomb. 
general  superintendent  of  the  Virginia  Central  rail  road,  to  the  con- 
ductors of  said  road : 

"  August  5,  1864. — On  and  after  Tuesday  next,  you  will  demand  from 
the  agents  of  the  post  office  department  traveling  on  the  cars,  the  regular 
fare  for  first  class  passengers.  In  executing  this  order  for  the  present, 
however,  nothing  is  to  be  done  to  the  route  agent  in  charge  of  the  mail, 
which  will  prevent  its  being  distributed  as  usual.  Should  he  refuse  pay- 
ment, your  remedy  will  be  to  report  the  feet  to  me  for  further  action. 

H.  D    WHITCOMB,  Gen.  Sup." 

To-day  the  order  was  made,  and  we  positively  refused  to  pay  the  fare. 
They  have  taken  our  water  cooler  and  stove  out,  and  we  now  have 
none  of  the  comforts  heretofore  enjoyed  in  the  car. 
Please  instruct  us  what  to  do. 

Very  respectfully, 

WM.  H.  HAAS, 
G.  G.  GOOCH, 

Route  Agents  Central  R.  R. 
Hon.  J.  H.  Reagan,  P.  M,  General 


25 

# 
Post  Office  Department, 
Richmond,  August  10,  1864 

GfiNTLEME* j 

Your  letter  of  yesterday,  famishing  me  with  a  copy  oi 
the  order  of  H.  D.  Whitcomb,  Esq.,  general  superintendent  of  the  Vir- 
ginia Central  rail  road,  dated  the  5th  instant,  to  the  conductors  of  said 
rail  road,  directing  them  to  demand  from  the  agents  of  the  post  office  de- 
partment the  regular  fare  for  first  class  passengers,  and  advising  me  of 
your  refusal  to  pay  the  fare,  is  received.  You  also  say,  "  they  [the  rail 
road  company]  have  taken  our  water  cooler  and  stove  out.  and  we  now 
have  none  of  the  comforts  heretofore  enjoyed  in  the  car." 

You  did  right  in  refusing  to  pay  the  fare  demanded  under  this  order, 
and  you  are  directed  not  to  go  upon  the  cars  of  this  company  as  the 
agents  of  this  department,  nor  to  attempt  to  carry  the  mails  on  them 
hereafter,  unless  by  its  directions,  hereafter  to  be  given. 

You  will  please  also  notify  Mr.  E.  J.  Swift,  your  associate  route  agent, 
that  tbif»  ord^r  applies  to  him  as  well  as  to  yourselves. 

Very  respectfully, 

JOHN  H.  REAGAN,  P.  M.  General 
Wm.  H.  Haas  and  G.  G.  Gooch,  Route  Agents  Va.  Cent.  R.  R. 


Hollinger  Corp. 
PH8.5 


